Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:20:19.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sires' own performance as an indication of progeny performance in testing Suffolk rams for growth rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. S. Broadbent  and
J. H. Watson
J. S. Broadbent
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Caernarvonshire
J. H. Watson
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Caernarvonshire
Get access

Extract

Comparisons of performance for growth rate were made on 15 Suffolk rams and their 362 Suffolk × Welsh progeny from 2 to 16 weeks of age or to 100 lb. live-weight, whichever was earliest.

The Suffolk rams were reared artificially from 7 days of age.

A high negative correlation was found between growth rate and efficiency of food conversion.

The correlation between the sires' growth rate and the growth rate of their progeny was 0·25. This was increased to 0·46 by limiting the performance test of progeny to the period between 8 to 16 weeks of age.

Heritability estimates increased as animals grew older. An estimate of 0·52 ±0·012 was obtained for the period 8–16 weeks of age.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , February 1967 , pp. 99 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERNCES

Bonsma, F. N., 1939. Factors influencing the growth and development of lambs with special reference to crossbreeding of Merino sheep for fat Iamb production in South Africa. Univ. of Pretoria, Publ. Ser. 1, No. 48.Google Scholar
Bowman, J. G., & Broadbent, J. S., 1966. Genetic parameters of growth between birth and sixteen weeks in Down Cross Sheep. Anim. Prod., 8: 129–135.Google Scholar
Broadbent, J. S., & Watson, J. H., 1966. Factors governing the shape of the growth curve of body weight and the age at slaughter of Suffolk × Welsh lambs. Anim. Prod., 8: 435–444.Google Scholar
Buck, S. F., 1964. A comparison of pigs slaughtered at 3 different weights I. Carcass quality and performance. J. agric. Sci., Camb., 60: 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassard, D. W., & Weir, W. C., 1956. Hereditary and environmental variation in the weights and growth rates of Suffolk lambs under farm conditions. J. Anim. Sci., 15:1221. (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Dickinson, A. G., 1960. Some genetic implications of maternal effects—an hypothesis of mammalian growth. J. agric. Sci., Camb., 54: 378–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, R. B., Brothers, D. G., & Whiteman, J. B., 1962. Heritability of gain of lambs measured at different times and by different methods. J. Anim. Sci., 21: 78–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundley, W. S. Jnr., & Carter, R. C., 1956. Heritability of growth rate and market grade in mutton lambs. J. Anim. Sci., 15: 1226 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
King, J. W. B., Smith, C., & Gilbert, N., 1962. Genetic parameters of British Large White bacon pigs. Anim. Prod., 4: 128–143.Google Scholar
Owen, J. B., 1957. A study of the location and growth of hill sheep in their native environment and under lowland conditions. J. agric. Sci., Camb., 48: 387–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar